navalcraftfandomcom-20200214-history
Talk:Heavy Cruiser/@comment-26482266-20160308070657/@comment-26482266-20160309020513
...I'm sorry, but could you people REALLY have the decency to not tell me that I suck and my ships are absolute garbage? I will address you both shortly, don't you wait. ---- @Ebola: The Proyekt 22 isn't "slow" by any means. I done my research; I know what cruisers are for. If you call anything that is 47 knots (or 52, after I removed some portion of the armor from Oi's advice) a "shit slow", dead slow ship, I don't know what the issue is. This is, BTW, with a 225k toughness engine cluster. The engines on your Atticus, naturally, is nearly 4 times more proportional than the 22, which explains how you can push for 60 knots. If we were to go by Walrus/Oi's shipbuilding skills, your ship would still be just as guilty for requiring THAT MUCH HORSEPOWER to reach 60 knots (For the Atticus, that is. The Strength class still has nearly twice the relative horsepower as the 22). Just because I hack doesn't mean that I take full advantage of that situation. I don't immediately make rainbow-coloured death barges after I injected my stocks with cash. I try limiting myself to plausible designs that I could use more flexibly. I done most things correct on the armor; in fact, when tested against a battlecruiser with 20 14cm guns, it took 3 ingame-recorded salvos at 1km to capsize the Proyekt 22. Hell, even versus torpedoes, a entire spread of Oxygen torpedoes wouldn't be enough to capsize it, and, depending on where it hits, can survive another salvo. Again, you have to consider that I am NOT striving for the best ship. Why would I, after I have seen ships the like of Walrus/Oi? Why would I chase after an impossible goal? Now, you might argue that I am a bad shipbuilder, and you are correct, but I am not exactly brain-dead when it comes to ship design. I done my research. Besides, if you are going to do that, why not criticize Kevin's heavy cruiser, the Neviston? That thing has nearly the exact same dimensions as the Proyekt 22, and nearly the same speed as well; in fact, the 22 actually goes FASTER. I given up mostly on AA weaponry. They do not have very good effectiveness; even with the most recent buff. The only AA's that you should be placing are the flak cannons; and that is the case (in which I have nearly 14 of them on the ship). Again, this ship was built off compromise; this was what made it such a pain to build in the first place. Weaponry that can reliably damage battleships, enough armor to take a major battering from a bigger battleship, and enough speed to run if necessary. When I meant that my cruiser was burdened, I meant that the cruiser was already reaching the limits of what I could theoretically work with. I didn't indicate that my cruiser was really that slow/burdened by tonnage. I didn't flood the ships with AA weapons, or other things. I do not strive for ships that are overloaded in terms of their size-level. Instead, I tend to go for the best possible firing arcs for existing weaponry, something that you don't follow particularly well when it comes to AA weaponry. I am smart enough to know what I am doing, and unless you can somehow rip the words out of my brain, I suggest for you to not run your mouth, and replace my words with yours. ---- @Oi: Suggestions noted; already tore down the light and medium armor for the deck and replaced it with deck panels; it seems to be going faster by about 3-4 knots. The Chimney C's were placeholders because I really could not find a better funnel to place on it. Every other tunnel that I tested was either too heavy (all of the capital-ship funnels), or too detrimental towards the free-board in the stern of the ship. Superstructure wise, I am not the exact best at building superstructures. Anyone who seen my BSC-Hansa built ships would know.